DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. AnzoGraph DB vs. Badger vs. Graph Engine vs. ToroDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. AnzoGraph DB vs. Badger vs. Graph Engine vs. ToroDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

ToroDB seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Scalable graph database built for online analytics and data harmonization with MPP scaling, high-performance analytical algorithms and reasoning, and virtualization

An embeddable, persistent, simple and fast Key-Value Store, written purely in Go.

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

A MongoDB-compatible JSON document store, built on top of PostgreSQL

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Key-value store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store

DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems
Trend Chart

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#303	Overall
	#25	Graph DBMS
	#14	RDF stores

Score	0.22
Rank	#320	Overall
	#47	Key-value stores

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

www.graphengine.io

github.com/torodb/server

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph/userdoc/home.htm

godoc.org/github.com/dgraph-io/badger

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Cambridge Semantics

DGraph Labs

Microsoft

8Kdata

Initial release

2012

2018

2017

2010

2016

Current release

2.3, January 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

AGPL-V3

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

.NET and C

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

.NET

All OS with a Java 7 VM

Data scheme

yes

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, boolean, date, object_id

XML support

Some form of processing data in XML format, e.g. support for XML data structures, and/or support for XPath, XQuery or XSLT.

Secondary indexes

restricted

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SPARQL and SPARQL* as primary query language. Cypher preview.

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Apache Mule
gRPC
JDBC
Kafka
OData access for BI tools
OpenCypher
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C++
Java
Python

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Automatic sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

none

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in MPP-Cluster

none

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

not needed in graphs

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users and roles

More information provided by the system vendor

We invite representatives of system vendors to contact us for updating and extending the system information,
and for displaying vendor-provided information such as key customers, competitive advantages and market metrics.